An Interesting Development in Climate Science

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by MichaelJoeWilliamson, Aug 8, 2013.

  1. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    This is an interesting development in climate science

    Sounds like settled science to me.

    http://www.climatecentral.org/news/oceans-iron-impact-could-alter-climate-predictions-16274

    http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk/

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/08/an-ocean-of-doubt.php
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,577
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,943
    The UN and their thirst for money wont let this die... along with the Libs in our congress they see "$$$" signs when they talk about this ruse.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. OaktownGator
    Offline

    OaktownGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    2,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +7,749
    Nice find. This is a complex topic.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. tegator80
    Offline

    tegator80 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    5,952
    Likes Received:
    1,072
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    Ratings Received:
    +2,618
    There is only one mystery: why are people who espouse Global Warming, let alone Anthropological, as fact considered anything but witch doctors?
  5. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,577
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,943
    Becasue they have failed to prove it is in fact anthropological? And ice core samples prove this cooling followed by warming and then cooling again as cycles that predates mankind.
  6. G8trGr8t
    Online

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    14,860
    Likes Received:
    1,151
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    SW Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +2,585
    there are too many unknown variables for any model to be accurate. garbage in, garbage out.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. g8orbill
    Offline

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    71,987
    Likes Received:
    4,867
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +10,275
    row is having a meltdown
    • Like Like x 2
  8. OaktownGator
    Offline

    OaktownGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    2,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +7,749
    Before we have a giant anti-AGW circle jerk, this doesn't mean global warming isn't occurring or that man isn't contributing.

    CO2 is demonstrably one factor that causes warming. That is a fact. And it is a fact that man is pushing CO2 levels much higher than they've been over the past several hundred thousand years.

    What this does show is that climate science is complex, it is continuing to evolve (as it objectively should), and this "iron cycle" is another variable that needs to be factored in.
  9. rivergator
    Online

    rivergator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    32,305
    Likes Received:
    413
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +2,090
    kind of hard to just dismiss the great majority of scientists simply because you'd rather not believe what they've found.
  10. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,577
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,943
    As long as we have trees to convert the CO2 back into Oxygen we'll be okay. Stop deforestation, that is the most important thing we can do about elevated CO2 levels.
  11. neisgator
    Offline

    neisgator Belligerent Gator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,618
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Quincy IL
    Ratings Received:
    +106
    I actually respect what you have written on this subject. I happen to disagree with it...but I respect it.

    I think it is a fairly simple issue...and not complex at all.
  12. GatorRade
    Offline

    GatorRade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,081
    Likes Received:
    270
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +921
    CO2 actually becomes sugar during photosynthesis, but I get your point. However, evidence indicates while plants are growing faster and sucking up an impressive amount of CO2, deforestation is probably only about 30% responsible for increases in atmospheric CO2.
  13. OaktownGator
    Offline

    OaktownGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    2,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +7,749
    Dead on about deforestation being a factor, Rick.

    And obviously the understanding of the role of iron in marine CO2 absorption needs further clarification in models. Good find by MJW.

    But the fact remains that the peak CO2 levels over the past several hundred thousand years were about 280ppm, while we're at ~400ppm now, and will probably hit 500ppm around 2050, and over 600ppm by 2100 at current rates of increase.

    It's been around 5 million years since CO2 was estimated at 400ppm. A good deal further back when CO2 was estimated at 500ppm or above. And the earth was a much, much warmer place in those days.

    I won't pretend to tell you what impact these CO2 levels will have or how long it will take to have those impacts. But we can't assume there won't be an impact, when we know CO2 is a forcing agent in warming.

    And as I mentioned in the other thread, maybe we can figure out a target CO2 level that is "good" and helps us avoid ice ages, without warming too much. But we need to keep advancing the science to figure that out.
  14. OaktownGator
    Offline

    OaktownGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    2,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +7,749
    Thanks. Appreciate that.

    When you say the issue is simple, are you talking about the political issue, or the climate science?

    I was specifically talking about the climate science as being complex.
  15. GatorRade
    Offline

    GatorRade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,081
    Likes Received:
    270
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +921
    Oak is a great poster with whom to converse about this issue, so i think you've picked a good one to respect. But there is little doubt that the workings of the planet's climate is very complex, and I think this deserves some respect too. Due to this complexity, I think it is not irrational to think we might not be in control of the predictions yet, but I do think that it is irrational to go the other way: being confident that humans cannot influence the climate.
  16. Minister_of_Information
    Offline

    Minister_of_Information I'm your huckleberry Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    14,420
    Likes Received:
    755
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    In my prime
    Ratings Received:
    +1,697
    Anthropogenic
    Catastrophic
    Remediable

    All must be established in order to justify any major efforts to mitigate CO2.
  17. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,577
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,943
    This looks like sound scientific data, although I have to trust you on the numbers.

    We've pretty much established that CO2 is rising. However, that is not the problem I have with this science. The problem is when we humans get theoretical about the consequences, timeline and recourse.

    The only answer coming from Washington is to implement the Kyoto treaty/protocol/accord or whatever they call it now, which is a non-starter.
  18. OaktownGator
    Offline

    OaktownGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    2,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +7,749
    I agree with you on having big problems with proposed "solutions" to date, as well as the level of alarmism that some folks want to communicate.

    That's why I am more interested in doing things we need to do anyway for health and economic security reasons.... like move to a greener, more self sufficient energy supply, and greener transportation. If that also helps CO2 levels, great.

    In the meantime, if we learn more about the science to where well informed solutions can be suggested (if needed), and all the major players buy in - that's great too.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. neisgator
    Offline

    neisgator Belligerent Gator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,618
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Quincy IL
    Ratings Received:
    +106
    Sorry. I wasn't clear.

    The political issue. Follow the money. The science is complex.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. DaveFla
    Offline

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,375
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +979
    Not "meltdown"... "Metabolic variance"...

Share This Page